Religious Thoughts

Fintilgin

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
57
While, all in all, I think the game sounds like it's coming together well and will be a lot of fun, I admit I'm not too happy about what I've heard about religion. Now it's not that I'm worried about offending people, `cause I'm not; it's just the small number of religions and semi-random nature of who gets them irks my sense of historical accuracy. I'm sure I'm not the only one who will be annoyed by seeing Hindu French, Christian Japanese, Buddhist Aztecs, and weirder things in every game. It seems likely that, as religion is determined by what tech you discover European civs will be no more likely to be Christian then any other Civ, and the Chinese will be Islamic as often as they're Confucian.

That makes the history buff in me cry anguished tears. :cry:

A simple and easy solution which will act as a band-aid to the problem is, if you found a religion you can name it, just like you name cities. I'm addicted to renaming my civilizations, leaders, and cities anyway, so I'll be preaty disapointed if this isn't in. Still, it won't help with the AI civs (unless they let us rename AI religions) and that will still rub me the wrong way.

Seeing as the religions are all generic in ability, they're only real differentiating characerstics will be name and probably an icon. My suggestion is to vary the name based of the Civilzation culture. This would be a purely aethetic change, but IMHO a needed one. For example, if Europeans discover polytheism they're religion is called Druidism. If an Asian civilization does it's called Hinduism. Same religion different name string/icon. There would still only be seven slots/techs open to found new religions with it's just that the name would be different depending on who discovered them.
Obviously they're be some overlap, but it might look a bit like this, with the religions/techs arranged chronolically:
(1 = Polytheism, 2 = Monotheism, 3 = whatever wakes Buddhism normally, etc...)

European Civs:
1.) Druidic
2.) Catholic
3.) Catholic
4.) Catholic
5.) Protestant
6.) Protestant
7.) Mormon

Med Civs (Greeks/Romans whatever):
1.) Helanistic
2.) Catholic
3.) Catholic
4.) Orthodox
5.) Orthodox
6.) Orthodox
7.) Protestant

African/Middle Eastern Civs
1.) Osirian (i.e. Egypian)
2.) Jewish
3.) Zorasterism
4.) Islamic
5.) Islamic
6.) Islamic
7.) Islamic

Asian
1.) Hindu
2.) Buddhist
3.) Buddhist
4.) Shinto
5.) Confucian
6.) Confucian
7.) Confucian

American
1.) Shamanistic
2.) Ometeotl
3.) Hanan Pacha
4.) (Fill in the blank)
5.) (Fill in the blank)
6.) (Fill in the blank)
7.) (Fill in the blank)

On reflection you'd need multiple tags, so you couldn't found two versions of 'Catholic', so it would be a bit more complex then just changing a string, but I still think it would add an enormous amount to the historical versimilitude of the game. It's one thing if they're conquered or converted, but I just think my suspension of disbelief won't be able to suffer through naturally Islamic Germanies, Buddhisist Incans, and similar abominations.


I write this next bit well aware that it's probably far too late to make such changes, but I really dislike the idea of all religions having the same abilities and being 'generic'. I understand why they didn't want to assign traits and offend people, but perhaps the traits could simply be assigned anew each game. What I mean is that all religions START generic, but if you are the lucky player who discovers, say Monothesim, then you get to PICK a trait for the religion you start. There would be seven traits, each one locked off once someone picks it so it can't be taken again. Here are some examples I dreamt up, better ones are surely possible:

Evangelism:
+Bonus to converting other relgions
-Relationships with nations with different religions is lower

Stability:
+Less unhappy people
-Penalty to science/cultural growth

Growth:
+Faster reproduction
-More unhappy people

Fanatic
+Bonus to unit Experience
-Penalty to converting others

Pacifist
+Bonus to production/tax rates
-Penalty to unit experience

Artisitc
+Bonus to cultural growth
-Penalty to production/tax rates

Chosen People
+Less unhappy people
-Penatly to converting others

The French discover Polytheism and pick Artistic, so they've got Hinduism(Druidism :mischief: ) is now Artistic. Next game the Germans discover Polytheism and Hinduism is Militristic. In some games Christianity might be Pacisfist, or Evangelic, or Fanatic. In others it might be Confucianism that has those traits.

This would, IMHO, make religion a lot more fun and interesting. Do you race to discover one first and pick a trait to benifit yourself or go for the Great Library instead? What do you pick when someone has the trait you want? What if you're playing a cultural strategy and your neighbors next door are converting your citizens to 'Stability' which decreases cultural growth? How do you manage your wars when your people are all religously non-violent?

Personally, I think this would be the best of both worlds. All the fun of religious traits, no chance of offending people by assigning them 'from on high', more strategy, and a different experience each game.

Anyway, just rattling off what I think. I doubt the game will be moddable enough to introduce traits, but if Firaxis is in feature lock or just dosn't like these ideas, maybe we'll be able to swing the first one with a mod.

Thoughts?
 
I'd like to see religions with bonueses, hardley unrealistic, considering that many religions tend to try to get thie rpeople to do different things; the caveat is, I'd liek to see it involved with two religions that wont be in the game; Roman Mithraism, and the cult of Isis, two religions who greatlly influenced, and had a very good chance to have beaten out christianity int he race for the main stay religion fo the Roman empire...

how could somthing liek this be impimented; well, lets take Judaism, CHristanity, and Islam for base examples; each religion is made alittle different by a "bonus" the religion gives to its adherents; Judaism has always seemed a scholarlly religion, so a science bonus seems in order; Islamic nations have historically dominated trade routes in soem fashion; an economic bonus seems in order for them; christanity is a bit harder, as it has often contradicted itself, but a civil order bonus seems liek it would work for them.

in this way, each religion is given a bonus that conductes itself well historically, based on the religions history; and whiel as a bit of a historian, I feel being politically correct, as opposed to just correct is one fo the stupidest ideals of all time, it woudl be easy to bring out a good point in all the major religions of today; likewise, by expanding the groups of religions to anicent religions, such as Mithraism, other bonuses- in Mithras' (or as the Romans knew him, "Sol Invictus", the "Invincible Sun") case, a military bonus-, to make thing more interesting, varying degrees of a bonus for several different aspects might be in order.
 
I agree so far as I don't think placing real religions in the game was a good idea. People tend to be very strange when it comes to their religion - even or especially when they act as having never heard about the principles of that particular one.
So, I would have preferred to find "The true believers of the yellow turtle", "The fraternity of the Holy Cloud" or whatever. Then we would have been free to have the chance to mod special abilities to them or to rename them to "real" ones, if we would have felt the need to do so.
Seems that this train has gone. :-(
 
I feel that real religious names are essential for verismilitude. I'd rather have no religion at all then the 'Cult of the Irritated Elephant' or the 'Church of the Ham Sandwich'. :p Furthermore, I think people's concerns about political correctness are way overblown. Did the religious right protest Medieval: Total War? Did they picket Paradox Entertaiment for giving Christianity and Islam different traits? Would anyone actually even NOTICE if Firaxis gave different religions different traits? No. No. No.

Now, maybe if Chrisitanity had -6 to all science, -10 to culture and -2 to military morale, while giving any Islamic civilization a free suicide bomber every five turns people would be offended. But even, wrong and stupid as it would be, no one would care outside of message boards like this. There's no visceral violence, no sprays of blood and gore, you don't get to sleep with a prostitute and murder her to get your money back... quite simply the wider world wouldn't bat an eye. A handful of numbers in an abstract strategy game wouldn't make the cover of Newsweek, preists wouldn't speak out about in church, and absolutely no one would protest outside the Firaxis building.

Anyway, now that I've got that out of my system, I'd love to see WAY more detail in religion. I'd love to see all old mystery cults and religions that could have triumphed. But then I'd love to see way more detail in all facets of the game. The thing is though, that I long ago came to peace with the fact that Civilization will NEVER be the ultra-detailed historical simulation I crave. It will always be, First and Foremost, a game. A fun game, to be sure, but the history is really no matter how much we might wish otherwise, for flavor. It's not meant to be an accurate representation or model of human civilization. It's supposed to be a bright, fun, slighlty cartoony game with a historical theme. Now obviously many of us would like more then that, but really changing it much from that formula would make it a whole new game.

All I really want is a nod to the cultural and historical realities of religious development. I certainly don't expect anything more then what I outlined (even though I might like it). I'm okay with a cartoony outline of history as long as we keep it loosely within the bounds of reality, which sounds like it's slipping a bit with the current 'Anything Goes' religion model.

Plus, I'm a little baffled that a game covering the entire sweep of human history completely skips ancient and Classical religion in favor of Johnny-Come-Latelys like Christianity. ;)
 
Maybe we should put religions only in Scenarios so that we can keep historic flavor that way but a nation changing over time it would be hard to keep one religion because nations change relgions, look at all the religions of Rome and not one civ in the game has had the same religion its entire existance except maybe the Celts.
 
Great ideas, Fintilgin-especially in regards to traits. Here is another idea, though. What say the trait(s) are defined by the major Social Engineering settings of the civ which founds it.
For instance, a religion which has civs belonging to it with an average theism of 8 (out of 10), may gain the fundamentalist trait, wheras one that has nations with lots of science will gain the scholarly trait. The issue is that traits can change according to the SE engineering settings of the founding nation-if those settings are in place long enough-and are picked up by any nation which joins said religion (so, say the Arabs have a religion with the scholarly trait, if the Persians join that religion then they get the scholarly trait as well). The other key factor is that a religion might only ever have 2 traits at most. Lastly, as the Founding Civs settings effect the religions traits, the same settings can-if they remain unchanged for too long-lead to sectarianism under certain circumstances. This whole model would work brilliantly to make religions truly interesting-whilst having the added benefit of not upseting anyones sensibilities (as you're not straitjacketing the realworld religions). Better yet, it would work well with generic OR realworld religion models. Lastly, though it might be too late to get these ideas into Civ4 Vanilla, there is always the chance of ideas like this making their way into expansions-IF we push it with enough vigour ;)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
I put mormanism on the European side mainly because I think America should be classified as a European civilization even if it does start world maps on the American continent.

But they're all preaty arbitrary and mostly for example purposes.

I did think it would be fun to have more traits, for example start with 14 traits and each religion picks two when generated. Or possibly one and then gets a second trait if they discover another religion founding tech.

I also thought it would be fun if some traits were tied to techs. So if you founded a very early religion you might only be able to pick from a couple traits like 'Stability' and 'Artistic'. If you wanted a religion with say, 'Evangalistic' you might have to wait until a certain tech was developed. Then the question is if you try to found a religion early and have a limited number of traits to pick from or hold off to try to get better ones later and risk having people beat you to them.
 
I'm sure given a couple of weeks/months, the modders will have a billion-zillion-zillion religions for you to throw in the game.

But it would be cool to be able to name religions if you were the first to discover it.
 
Fintilgin said:
...the small number of religions and semi-random nature of who gets them irks my sense of historical accuracy. I'm sure I'm not the only one who will be annoyed by seeing Hindu French, Christian Japanese, Buddhist Aztecs, and weirder things in every game. It seems likely that, as religion is determined by what tech you discover European civs will be no more likely to be Christian then any other Civ, and the Chinese will be Islamic as often as they're Confucian.

I can see how this might cause a little bit of problems to some folk, but not me! Even as somewhat of an amateur history nut and purist, I'm also pretty aware that most of the religions of the world often found thier places on the map by flukes.

Take the christianity/europe connection. Why did a bunch of Indo-aryans pick up on a judaic-based religion from the middle-east? Without getting into the argument of whether or not Christ was the son of god or a prophet of any kind, it's pretty amazing that the teachings of one man and his few followers managed to have such a huge impact on the world. But social conditions in the roman empire, thier network of secure roads and the simplicity of the message (and 100 other things I'm sure, like I said, I'm an amateur...) managed to let the faith spread far and wide. Even with all that, if Emperor constantine hadn't made a dying conversion to christianity, or if the Ottoman empire hadn't been defeated in hungary, or if the Czar of Russia had decided against making Chirstianity the state religion, we might have several competing religions in europe today.

I guess what I'm saying is that it takes just the right combination of conditions and events to choose the faith of an empire, and in a game like civyou're supposed to screw around with history!

Having said all that, I do very much like your idea for picking traits associated with a religion, (shouldn't there be an option to have a monarch-deity religion, so you can be thier ruler AND god...??) and being able to name it as well... maybe for civV, VI, or whatever version of this I'll be playing when I'm old and grey....
 
I'm with Che Guava. In theory, any religious school of thought could have been founded in any part of the world, and some could have spread much faster and others could have died out much sooner. I like the idea of playing through multiple possible histories, rather than a hardwired history (let alone a really vague empty history).
 
Fintilgin said:
While, all in all, I think the game sounds like it's coming together well and will be a lot of fun, I admit I'm not too happy about what I've heard about religion. Now it's not that I'm worried about offending people, `cause I'm not; it's just the small number of religions and semi-random nature of who gets them irks my sense of historical accuracy. I'm sure I'm not the only one who will be annoyed by seeing Hindu French, Christian Japanese, Buddhist Aztecs, and weirder things in every game. It seems likely that, as religion is determined by what tech you discover European civs will be no more likely to be Christian then any other Civ, and the Chinese will be Islamic as often as they're Confucian.

snip..

Thoughts?

French Pyramids and Aztec Great Wall are ok though, aren't they ;)
 
I would like the religions to have standarised names and also to be able to change that standarised name from 'Shinto' to 'Cult of the Middle Finger'. I would also like the religions to be fully customisable by default, that is, allthough you may have standarised, but customisable religion-names, the religions themselves aren't standard set up with attributes, that is fully up to the player to decide.

I would like the attributes wich you can tie to your religion to be tied to techs, so that your civilisation starts off worshiping a stone (or in my case, a middle finger), then you have to choose whether to research tech 1 and get attribute A, or tech 2 and get attribute B. I'm also positive to the idea of having multiple attributes tied to a religion, preferably 2, but you start with 0 and you have a set of opposing attributes that don't go together (my 'Cult of the Middle Finger' will be militaristic so of course it can't be pasifistic at the same time), and all attributes have both ups and downs. I think if you have an attribute called 'fanatic' the you should have an 'agnostic' or even 'atheistic' attribute to oppose that.

The way I would like religions to be, is like a quasi-government. You can change the attributes through "religious reform" as you advance in time, much like how you change governmet, but without so much chaos. Making it like that, maybe you'll have the choice between researching the democracy tech, or researching a tech that gives you an 'enlightened' attribute option to your religion ('enlightened' could provide science bonus).

Contrary to governments, I would not like the religious attributes to grow obsolete in time. When you reach industrial/modern age in Civ3, you only have a few realistic choices between governments - the rest is obsolete. So if you can get a 'fertile' (i.e. "growth") attribute in the ancient times, that could be just as good in modern ages.
 
Yes, I also think that the religions should have a more pre-defined path. That is, Europeans to take the Christian route. Of course, they should have the option to choose other religions but their historical accurate one should naturally be easier.

But I'm not complaining. I'm just glad they're adding religion. This is going to be phenomenal.
 
Bast said:
Yes, I also think that the religions should have a more pre-defined path. That is, Europeans to take the Christian route. Of course, they should have the option to choose other religions but their historical accurate one should naturally be easier.

Why? If I'm playing an Earth map with accurate starting locations, sure, I'd agree, but otherwise.. Why would it be harder for me to have hindu french, when it's just as easy as with any other nation to build the Hanging Gardens in Paris?
 
Bast said:
Yes, I also think that the religions should have a more pre-defined path. That is, Europeans to take the Christian route. Of course, they should have the option to choose other religions but their historical accurate one should naturally be easier.

But I'm not complaining. I'm just glad they're adding religion. This is going to be phenomenal.

I disagree. The way I see it, you may have a standard name for the religion for a country (e.g. 'Shinto' for the Japanese), but you should also be able to change that name into whatever you wany (e.g. 'Cult of the Middle Finger').
The religions should also be only what you choose it to be, by selecting attributes for it (e.g. 'Fanatic', 'Evangelic', 'Enlightened'), and those choices you give your civilisation both bonuses and penalties. That way you won't have a "Christian route", "Islamic route" or "Hindu route". The religions will only be what you make them, and the name really just is a name; it doesn't really matter.

For those of you who haven't read it, I have elaborated my thoughts about religions a couple of posts up.
 
Fintilgin said:
While, all in all, I think the game sounds like it's coming together well and will be a lot of fun, I admit I'm not too happy about what I've heard about religion. Now it's not that I'm worried about offending people, `cause I'm not; it's just the small number of religions and semi-random nature of who gets them irks my sense of historical accuracy. I'm sure I'm not the only one who will be annoyed by seeing Hindu French, Christian Japanese, Buddhist Aztecs, and weirder things in every game. It seems likely that, as religion is determined by what tech you discover European civs will be no more likely to be Christian then any other Civ, and the Chinese will be Islamic as often as they're Confucian.

That makes the history buff in me cry anguished tears. :cry:


Why should that make you cry? We already have a game where it's possible for the Incas to build the Great Wall, the Zulus build the Great Library, the Chinese build the Statue of Zeus, and the Arabs build the Knights Templar.
 
The game is never going to be 100% accurate. As Narmox said, There could be a Zulu Great Lighthouse, Arab SETI program, American Sun Tzu Art of War. We could have the Americans conquered by the Roman Empire in 44 BC, the French would be running around with guys with axes, Pyrhhus Being created in the year 1050 AD. Religion is going to be just like that, and make the game fun, despite the name. Besides, if they were all the same religion as in rl, the game wouldn't be fun.
 
I think the game should be accurate in taking some inspiration for mechanisms from real life.

But the game should be inaccurate in two ways:

- choices should be balanced
- choices should be in the game, so you can rewrite history -- not just at the startup screen
 
Back
Top Bottom